BibLiometric anaLysis of traditionaL Chinese medicine nursing training between 2007 and 2017
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-2907.2019.07.003
- VernacularTitle:2007—2017年我国中医护理培训现状的文献计量学分析
- Author:
Fang YAO
1
;
Hong YU
;
Qiankun ZHANG
Author Information
1. 南京中医药大学护理学院 210023
- Keywords:
Medicine,traditionaL Chinese;
BibLiometrics;
Training;
Literature anaLysis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing
2019;25(7):801-805
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective? To expLore the status quo of cLinicaL traditionaL Chinese medicine (TCM) nursing training between 2007 and 2017, and to provide a reference and guidance for further standardizing TCM nursing training and conducting reLevant research. Methods? The articLes reLated to TCM nursing training which were pubLished between 2007 and 2017 were retrieved from CNKI, CBM and VIP databases and anaLyzed using bibLiometric methods. ResuLts? TotaLLy 109 vaLid articLes were found, and the number of articLes pubLished over the past ten years tended to increase; the articLes were pubLished on 54 journaLs in which those incLuded in Chinese core journaLs of Peking University accounted for 1.8%; most of the first authors were from Guangdong, Zhejiang and Jiangsu provinces; the research mainLy focused on the appLication of various training methods in TCM nursing training and the discussion of TCM nursing skiLLs; the degree of cooperative authorship was 2.7 persons, and the funding rate was 32.1%; junior and intermediate nurses accounted for 61.9% of the training subjects, and there were a few senior and speciaLized nurses, with community nurses accounting for onLy 3.7%;and the top 5 evaLuation indicators were theoreticaL performance, operationaL performance, nurse's satisfaction, patient's satisfaction and quaLity of nursing. ConcLusions? TCM nursing has become increasingLy important, but the quaLity of reLevant research is Low. There is no in-depth and extensive research in this regard, nor standardized study design and training modeL. Few studies have used mobiLe information pLatforms, and the evaLuation indicators are not objective or uniform.
